9mm load data - what am I not understanding? (new reloader)

[Wise_A]

I would start at the upper end of your Lyman data. If I remember correctly, I didn't start to get good function with Unique and 125-gr until 4.6 or 4.7, and it wasn't super-reliable.

one of my teenagers will sit with me for hours running the press and talking so I would pay a premium in order to reload.

Laudable, but I advise people against talking while reloading. It's extremely easy to get distracted, and I can think of two or three kabooms personally known to me that happened with two people talking at a reloading bench.

However...

Most reasonable 9mm loads I've used hover around 66-75% case fill. If you've got a light on the case, it's very easy to check for no-charge, and a double-charge should be noticeable, although not to the point that I'd bet my fingers or eyes on it. For instance, some powder dispensers, when actuated around a turret press (and here I'm thinking of the Lee Auto-Disk) drop quite consistent charges. But if you fail to actuate the press and double-charge, you don't get two full charges, you get 1.5 or thereabouts.

What I'd look at is some team reloading. Forget the time and rounds per hour, and just look at doing stuff together--a single-stage is cheap and might be a ton of fun:

*Person A resizes and deprimes on the press, Person B uses a hand- or bench-mounted priming tool.

*Person A charges with a benchtop dispenser (I love my Lee Perfect Powder Measure), Person B seats bullets on the single-stage.

That way, you're splitting up the loading, everybody's doing something, and it's very easy to eyeball cases before seating bullets. Also might be neat for him/her to have their "own" reloading press, and I guarantee you'll find a use for it as well.

That is do NOT use Unique for 9mm unless you hand weight every single charge thrown.

Unique works fine in 9mm, although I prefer Bullseye or Power Pistol, depending on the bullet. I still have hands.

AA#5 is great, but this is how you wind up with a loading bench like mine--seven or eight cartridges and sixteen different powders to load them with.

Another reason I stopped Bullseye too, not a bad powder per se but others are just way better. If you throw them and not weight them that is.

How did you manage to get Bullseye to not throw well?

 

[Nevada Ed]

Unique powder in the 9mm case does BEST with 90% to full loads or
even +P loads if needed.

It can do light loads but..........
there are a lot of faster powders that get better accuracy from my pistols and.......
generally will do it with a lot less powder.

Down the road you might want to pick up some Bullseye or w231 type powder for those light target loads.

Since I load for shotguns........
I have found that a 115 up to the heavy 147gr plated bullets do very well in light
target loads with Green Dot , of all powders??

Stay safe.

 

[Dahak]

Thanks for all the input so far. It seems the variable I missed was that not all 124 grain bullets are the same. I need to go looking for some manuals that list the closet thing to the bullets that I will be using. I suspect one of the manuals listed earlier in this thread will be a good one for me, I'll study up see which one will be best for me.

As far as the safety aspect, we measure every 5th charge and run a turret press (Lyman t mag 2) like a single stage in batches of 50 and check how everything looks (primer depth, charge height, etc) before going to the next step. While eventually I may switch to a more sense powder, I'm liking the unique as a"bulky " powder so far since a double charge is very visually apparent.

 

[Rogeronimo]

Bulky is good. Takes any position sensitivity issues out of the equation. I run 800X behind my 124s, and my cases are stuffed. Doesn't meter at all, so I'm not steering you or anyone in that direction. Best of luck.

 

[Nevada Ed]

800x.................... ! ?

Boy, you must have a lot of spare time to load with that powder.

I bought a pound of it once.............
If it was not for the new steel duck loads needed back then, it would still
be sitting on my shelf.

 

[27Veer]

I always have at least 3 lbs of Unique in store. It really is the most useful powder there is. One thing I like for beginners is that is fills the brass so getting a double load is very rare.
I use 4.5 grains and load everything because I bought much when I thought Hillery was going to be president.

However my most accurate load is 5 grains of P B. With a Montana Gold124 grain bullet.

 

[gwpercle]

Thanks for all the input so far. It seems the variable I missed was that not all 124 grain bullets are the same. I need to go looking for some manuals that list the closet thing to the bullets that I will be using. I suspect one of the manuals listed earlier in this thread will be a good one for me, I'll study up see which one will be best for me.

As far as the safety aspect, we measure every 5th charge and run a turret press (Lyman t mag 2) like a single stage in batches of 50 and check how everything looks (primer depth, charge height, etc) before going to the next step. While eventually I may switch to a more sense powder, I'm liking the unique as a"bulky " powder so far since a double charge is very visually apparent.

Bullet profile , construction and type are details that matter big time . Don't interchange data for cast lead and jacketed .
You can use data for cast lead with powder coated and plated bullets .
You really need to have at least 4 different sources of data to compare to get an idea of where min and max charges might be.
Something to look at is a booklet called "One Book/One Caliber" "The Complete Reloading Manual for the 9mm Luger" published by Loadbooks USA . It takes all the load data from manuals , powder manufacturers and bullet makers for the 9mm and puts it in one booklet...It Is Sweet having all that data in one booklet.
$9.99 at Midway and cheaper on Amazon .
I ordered one for 41 Magnum and even though I have a dozen manuals I'm going to get a few more ... If you don't need a big reloading manual check out these babies...they are nice.
Gary

 

[Rogeronimo]

800x.................... ! ?

Boy, you must have a lot of spare time to load with that powder.

My first powder to load with was Herco (45ACP/44 S&W Special ... I didn't care for how it metered, either ... so I developed the patience and a bit of a knack for running a beam scale. I also developed a deep love for the old flake powders ... it just 'feels' right when you light 'em off. You can probably feel it in your loins when you're working with Green○Dot. 800X was a natural evolutionary experiment for me.

 

[glenwolde]

Bulky is good. Takes any position sensitivity issues out of the equation. I run 800X behind my 124s, and my cases are stuffed. Doesn't meter at all, so I'm not steering you or anyone in that direction. Best of luck.

I've used 800-X some, but more so it's step-brother 700-X. These two make Unique look like a metering champ. For the most part it threw OK but as has been pointed out...there's the outliers on the bell curve.

I strapped an aquarium pump to my powder measure. The vibration settles the powder and it nows throws consistently though if it sits for longer than the normal cycle it may throw a tad heavy.

 

[Ole Joe Clark]

Unique has been my go to powder since the mid 1970. Works great.
I reload 9mm, using Unique and 124 gr bullets. Have loaded several thousand rounds of them with no problems.

One thing that I do with semi auto rounds that I don't do for revolver reloads, is plunk test every round after reloading. When I was reloading 40 cal I had a few problems learning to do them right. Problem solved when I started the plunk test routine.

Have a blessed day,

Leon

 

[Nevada Ed]

+1;
nice add on Joe.......... a plunk test is always nice with a new load.

As for the 800-x, it also makes one heck of a +P load in a 38 snub nose
if you add a little too much powder to the case.

They all work, just some are better at things but some smell better when fired.........

Sort of like Napalm............ (Joke)

 

[smyke]

Dahak
What did you end up with?
I am looking at the exact same situation

 

[reccpd101]

What?

A few thoughts:

Different data from different perspectives:

Bullet companies have the luxury of testing and then listing data for specific bullets, or a limited number of specific bullets they make in that weight.

Powder company data has to encompass a broad range of bullets in that weight or in some cases weight range. Even if you restrict the data to jacketed bullets, there is variation in lead core hardness, jacket thickness and hardness, and bearing surface, all of which have impacts on pressure. If you restrict it to cast lead bullets you still have differences in alloy hardness, diameter, lube effectiveness and bearing surface that all effect both pressure and potential for leading.


Limited space in manuals:

There are practical limits to manual size and both bullet and powder companies want to include the latest gee whiz powders being marketed. When it comes down to choosing to repeat old data or list new data, the new data wins most of the time.

That means data on old go to powders like Bullseye, Red Dot, Unique, etc can be hard to find in newer manuals.


Powder formulations do change over time:

The National Center for Forensic Science maintains a database on powder chemical composition over the years that is useful in analysing gunshot residue. It's also interesting for a handloader who wonders if today's power is the same as that can made 20 years ago, and in turn how useful that data may be from 20 years ago.

For example you'll find six variations of Unique.

National Center for Forensic Science

Despite variation in the chemical formulation the over all burn traits should be very similar, but the take away is to use old data fairly conservatively by starting about 10% low and working up to in your firearm with your components.


Test standards have evolved:

Back in the day pressure was measured with a copper crusher. Since it relied on deformation of a copper cylinder, which also involved a brief time element while the copper deformed the peak pressure measured wasn't the same as it is now with much more responsive piezoelectric measurement of pressure.

That change resulted in new maximum average pressure standards for some loads, usually being adjusted downward and old manuals (mid 70s and before) may not reflect those changes. For example, the Hornady 3rd edition published in 1973 is regarded by some folks as having some fairly hot loads, and that's supported by comparison with load data in later manuals where the max loads for some of the cartridge, powder and bullet weight combinations are significantly lower, even with the same test firearm used in both manuals.


Charges listed in manuals are nominal charges:

Canister grade powders used in handloading are far more consistent than the bulk powders used by ammunition manufacturers and military arsenals. However, they still have some variation.

There are some powders that are acknowledged to be the "same" powder just with different labels. H110 and Win 296 is one of the better known examples. HP38 and Win 231 is another well known example. However if you look at a particular manual and you look at a particular page that lists both powders for the same bullet, it's not uncommon to find a .5 to .7 grain difference in the maximum loads listed on that page. If they are the same powder why is that? It's because they were randomly selected and packaged from different lots of powder that have normal lot to lot variation.

Your take away from that needs to be that if you have two cans of H110 from different lots, you should expect to potentially see the same variation in lots.

Again, this is why manuals almost always advise starting 10% below and maximum load and working up.


Surplus and bulk powders are not the same as canister powders:

What really makes me shake my head is when some internet expert starts citing a specific powder charge of a military powder like WC844 or WC 846 to duplicate a military load. They do that because they see a specification for a nominal load of powder and think it means something far more precise.

How it really works is that Dupont will ship a 10,000 pound lot of "WC 844" to an ammunition plant to produce 5.56x45 NATO ammunition. When the lot arrives, ballisticians will work up a load specific to that 10,000 pound powder lot to get the required velocity within the maximum pressure limits specified by the military.

For example with one lot of WC844 for use in M193 27.0 grains might produce 3,200 fps while another lot of WC 844 may produce 3,185 fps with a 28.0 grain charge. That's a significant difference. The end result is that with that 10,000 pound lot, you'll end up with about 2.4 million rounds of M193 that are loaded with a specific charge weight that may not be the same as other M193 loaded from a different lot of powder. Those different lots of M193 will however have the same average velocity.

This gets us to another scary issue with surplus pull down powders. If a company is pulling bullets on surplus ammo and then dumping the powder, you never know quite what you are going to get. It it all came from the same 24 million or so rounds loaded from that single lot of powder, you are good to go. But that's not likely and when powder from different lot is mixed, you're now clearly in crash test dummy territory with an unknown powder that may or may not be homogenous in the keg. If it isn't in a factory sealed keg from DuPont, I'll pass on WC844 and WC846.

WC844 is also a special case as the "WC844" specification was developed specifically for M193 and it was taken from one end of the much wider WC846 specification used for 7.62x51 M80 ball ammo. In other words if you think 1 grain variation is something, wait until you see a 1.5 or 2.0 grain variation in the larger round. But none the less you see some fool posting an exact charge weight to replicate M80 ball.

It gets worse when the internet expert states that WC844 is the same as H335 and that WC846 is the same as BLC(2). It's more accurate to say that WC844 is similar to H335 and that WC846 is similar to BLC(2) but that's as far as it goes. H335 and BLC(2), as canister powders do adhere to tighter specifications.

To make the point about the wide range found in a bulk powder consider that WC844 was just a subset of WC846, and then see where H335 and BLC(2) are at on a powder burn rate chart.

On one particular chart H335 is listed as #81 right after Benchmark, N133 and IMR 3031. BLC(2) is listed as #102, in between W748 and Leverevolution and H380. In between H335 and BLC(2) you'll find IMR 4895, IMR 4064 and IMR 4320. No one considers those to be the same powders, but you'll find an internet expert claiming an exact charge for WC846 when it spans that entire burn range. They'd never suggest a single correct charge that could be used for IMR 4895, 4064 and 4320, but they'll do it for WC 844 or WC846 because they don't know what they are talking about.

If you've googled some burn rate charts or compared charts in different manuals you've probably also discovered that no two powder burn rate charts ever agree completely.

The take away here is that if you decide to start buying and shooting surplus powders you need to know what you are doing and you need to be very conservative in your approach to load development.

You are going way over the initial poster's question. The idea is to help him with his issue. I am sure he is a long way from trying to use bulk military powder or trying to load 5.56 or 7.62.
still, you're point is well taken avoid armchair experts.

 

[buckshotshorty]

My go to load with plated or powder coated bullets 124 or 125 gr. Bullets is 3.7 gr. TiteGroup or 4.5 Unique. The Unique load is the lowest I would go to reliably cycle a 9mm auto and it is a very mild load.

 

[fredj338]

Why I think new reloaders should take a class from a knowledgable reloading instructor. Reloading manuals are guides, not bibles. The data really only applies if you use exact components & in the same testing platform.
Example, you are using plated bullets & your data source is jacketed. So you are kinda flying blind. Lead bullets load diff than plate & plated diff from jacketed. OAL is always bullet & barrel specific. There are a bunch of little knoweledge things that take time to research. Why a good class is worth it imo. Next best thing, find someplace online with guys that seem like they know their stuff & ask a lot of questions.

 

[Dahak]

Dahak
What did you end up with?
I am looking at the exact same situation

I ended up using the Speer data (available online: https://www.speer-ammo.com/download...m_caliber_355-366_dia/9mm_Luger__124_rev1.pdf ) and determining that the TMJ RN is equivalent to the Berry's plated bullets, especially loading under 1200 fps, which is the warning line for Berry's plating.

I'm at pretty much the middle of the road on the Speer chart. I've also learned a lot about controlling my powder throws and measures since my original post so am not as concerned about setting the powder measure to just one setting.

In addition to the realization that bullets are more than weights and that design/shape/materials matter, I've also figured out that OAL greatly affects pressure, which is one area where published sources differ. Different OALs will cause different powder amounts.

I'm at the point where I can see how all the factors (weight, bullet type, powder type, powder amount, and OAL) inter-relate. I can predict what happens when one or more of those variables change, but don't have enough experience to know how much a change in one affects the final result. I'll probably will never gain that knowledge without a chronograph and more time than I have available at the range, but I am a much more informed selector of data from the manuals now than just a few months ago.

 

[Rule3]

Information overload is common when posting on internet forums


The best investment is to BUY some actual manuals like Speer and Hornady (there are others)


If you do not have the exact bullet, use data for a similar PROFILE and WEIGHT
Plunk test the dummy round in your barrel
Avoid super fast powders (use medium powders they are more forgiving)

Start low and work up

 

[WR Moore]

In a perfect world, I'll use 4.8-4.9 grains as that is what I am using for my 38spl loads and not having to reset the powder measure between my 2 most common calibers would be awesome. Some internet sleuthing says 5.0 for 124gr Berrys is a common, middle of the road load. (perfect, but that's also confirmation bias speaking)

So A: immediate question - Does 4.8-4.9 grains of Unique seem reasonable based on your experience and B: long-term question - How do I as a novice reloader deal with such a large variance in data from 2 very credible sources?

You don't specify the weight of bullet in your .38 Spl loads. I'd guess you're using 158 gr. If so, that's just a tad warm, you're approaching +P but you're not there yet-at least with some bullets and depending upon seating depth.

Back when, I used to use 4.5 g Unique for both 158 gr .38 Spl and 125 gr cast lead in 9 mm. In 9 mm, that barely made 1000 f/s. They were reasonably close to factory in .38.

My experience is that with Unique (and BE86) in 9 mm, around 0.3-0.4 gr less powder than you'd need for a jacketed bullet of the same weight will produce about the same velocities with a plated bullet. The jacket being softer and requiring less powder to drive the bullet at XXXX f/s.

In short, your 4.8-4.9 gr powder measure setting is probably OK for both (5.0 gr being a long time published maximum load with 124 gr jacketed bullets), but it does depend upon your loaded overall length. If you can, load up about 5 as test items and carefully check your primers after firing.'

Added: there seems to be a fairly wide variation in rim diameter in various 9 mm sources. Do yourself a favor and do your die setup using a 38 Super shell holder. Or use the Lyman shell holder, it's the same for both. That will cover about any make of 9 mm brass.

 

[reccpd101]

Good advice

Why I think new reloaders should take a class from a knowledgable reloading instructor. Reliading manuals are guides, not bibles. The data really only applies if you use exact components & in the same testing platform.
Example, you are using plated bullets & your data source is jacketed. So you are kinda flying blind. Lead bullets load diff than plate & plated diff from jacketed. OAL is always bullet & barrel specific. There are a bunch of little knoweledge things that take time to research. Why a good class is worth it imo. Next best thing, find someplace online with guys that seem like they know their stuff & ask a lot of questions.

Here in NC. Montgomery County community college offers a continuing education class at low cost to the public in Basic Reloading. It is on the calendar but unknown of the effect of the attempts to control the virus.

 

[fredj338]

I ended up using the Speer data (available online: https://www.speer-ammo.com/download...m_caliber_355-366_dia/9mm_Luger__124_rev1.pdf ) and determining that the TMJ RN is equivalent to the Berry's plated bullets, especially loading under 1200 fps, which is the warning line for Berry's plating.

I'm at pretty much the middle of the road on the Speer chart. I've also learned a lot about controlling my powder throws and measures since my original post so am not as concerned about setting the powder measure to just one setting.

In addition to the realization that bullets are more than weights and that design/shape/materials matter, I've also figured out that OAL greatly affects pressure, which is one area where published sources differ. Different OALs will cause different powder amounts.

I'm at the point where I can see how all the factors (weight, bullet type, powder type, powder amount, and OAL) inter-relate. I can predict what happens when one or more of those variables change, but don't have enough experience to know how much a change in one affects the final result. I'll probably will never gain that knowledge without a chronograph and more time than I have available at the range, but I am a much more informed selector of data from the manuals now than just a few months ago.

So you are getting a grasp on it. There are few absolutes in reloading however.
Yes OAL matters, but it just depends on case volume, powder burn speed & charge weights. Powder compression in itself is not an over pressure vent.
Bullets are NOT plug & play, especially if you worked a load up to near max or max. At max, everything matters; bullet type, case brand, OAL, even primers can push you to over pressure.
Yes a choro can help but only if you understand the data it provides. It wont tell you pressures but will show you potential trends in pressure increase. For me a chrono is an essential tool.
Keep meticulous notes as you develop loads.